G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Having a really good discussion in the MLB thread about the DH. Want to do a poll. Here we are.Also, some talk about whether who you're a fan of--an AL team or an NL team--influences your opinion of the DH so that's part of the poll too.Edit: goddammit. Can't seem to do a poll on the mobile site and when I go to the full version, I can only see half is the poll table/form. My bad you all. Let me hit up a mod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Hate the DH. Yes, I'm a Giants (National League) fan, but I hated it back when I followed the Orioles. Baseball is mostly about individual matchups, but to the extent that there is managerial strategy, the DH takes at least half of it away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 This is the one joke about the MLB that I hate, they can't evolve. Either DH or no DH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovetoaster Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 I am an Orioles fan, so I like the DH for the most part. I like that is extended the careers of guys like Harold Baines, Edgar Martinez and Jim Thome. Conversely, most pitchers are just such godawful hitters. It is just painful to watch sometimes. But Predicto is right, it takes a pretty big element of strategy out of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonez3 Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Well, to boil it down, do you like to strategize around a wasted at bat or a valued at bat. Seriously, all the arguments that are made for no DH can be flipped on its side and argued for why DH is better. I'm a Bosox fan, so yea I'm skewed. But I'm a big baseball fan and simply think every at bat should be a challenging out. Not a way to strategize around because its such a weak spot in the lineup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Well, to boil it down, do you like to strategize around a wasted at bat or a valued at bat. Seriously, all the arguments that are made for no DH can be flipped on its side and argued for why DH is better. I'm a Bosox fan, so yea I'm skewed. But I'm a big baseball fan and simply think every at bat should be a challenging out. Not a way to strategize around because its such a weak spot in the lineup. But that's why pinch hitters matter. That's why a manager has to decide whether it is worth it to take out a starter. Is there anyone on? Where in the game are you? How important is this one at bat? Close games in the NL involve multiple decisions like that, and require the team to have situational relievers for multiple contingencies. In the AL, you only take out your starter when he is getting shelled, your relievers are basically set up man, closer and filler, pinch hitters don't matter. Strategy consists of letting the fat guy swing and hoping he hits one out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosher Ham Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 It's one of the things I hate about baseball. As an O's fan I still can't stand it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Me too. The whole league needs the same rule, and I voted no. Everyone on both sides of the ball, since they just stand around most of the time.Sorry, I lost baseball enthusiasm with the (as we refer to it here in ATL) Tom Glavine strike. It was my first true sporting love along with golf, but football, basketball, & hockey took over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StillUnknown Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 I have always hated the DH, makes managing a game entirely too easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfitzo53 Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 "I believe in a Constitutional amendment outlawing astroturf and the designated hitter." - Crash Davis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Me too. The whole league needs the same rule, and I voted no. Everyone on both sides of the ball, since they just stand around most of the time. Sorry, I lost baseball enthusiasm with the (as we refer to it here in ATL) Tom Glavine strike. It was my first true sporting love along with golf, but football, basketball, & hockey took over. The Tom Glavine strike? You mean the way Tom Glavine used to get to throw the ball 18 inches off the plate at the ankle, and the umps would call it a strike, while the opposing pitchers had to stay in the actual strike zone? Because that used to piss me off too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dont Taze Me Bro Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Hate it, Braves fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhead36 Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 copied and pasted from MLB thread I prefer having a DH in both leagues. Here are my reasons: 1. It extends players careers. Many players who can't field anymore due to age/injuries can go DH and still have a productive end of their careers. Doubling the # of teams that can DH increases the amount of players who can remain productive. This is also somewhat selfish on my part since it would help the Nats, we could DH Ryan Zimmerman, but really I'm sure a lot of teams are in a similar situation with an aging, injury prone star who can't field. 2. It's more entertaining. Yeah I know blah blah blah strategy with the pitcher hitting, but honestly do people enjoy watching the pitcher hit? I hate when my team has two on two out yet you know the inning is over because Gio Gonzalez or Tanner Roark are up to bat. Nobody likes watching pitchers hit. It'd be like forcing QBs in the NFL to play on Special Teams. 3. League uniformity. It's silly to have half the teams in a league playing with a different set of rules. I know back in the day the AL and the NL were considered different entities but that was like 50+ years ago. It's all MLB now. I mean imagine if in the NBA the Eastern Conference teams could only play with four players or if in the NFL you had AFC teams being allowed to have five downs to advance. And since you really can't go backwards, that means DH in both leagues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONAWARPATH Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Nationals fan and I hate when the pitcher hits...so yeah, put me in the "pro DH camp" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 The Tom Glavine strike? You mean the way Tom Glavine used to get to throw the ball 18 inches off the plate at the ankle, and the umps would call it a strike, while the opposing pitchers had to stay in the actual strike zone? Because that used to piss me off too. us too, we shoulda won more championships off of it, .......I keed, I keed...we had serious bats & never got it done when it counted. I know. I went to buttloads of games back then. Seeing Greg on opening day vs. the Brewers in (iirc) their virgin game in the NL was friggin' fantastic! (I got the call just a few hours before first pitch...had to hurry up setting up a full setting dining room for 80...we got there second inning, but OPENING DAY! MADDUX! Actually, Tom was head of the player's union during "the drama". I went to Lollapalooza the day the strike started and I don't think I've fully recovered from that day yet, kid you not...and my husband concurs. (I miss our old smiley collection so much right now.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCSaints_fan Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 Most of the objections I hear for the DH, isn't that the pitcher should have to bat (they do enough and are never valued for their bats anyway), but that the DH should have to field. So here's my compromise rule: For each inning a batter is listed in the lineup, he must take the field for 4 innings for every 9. I envision a usual situation would be a player starts the game as DH, then in the 5th inning, they have to take the field as 1B or whatever position, and the player they replace becomes the DH. If a player can't/doesn't take the field in the same game for whatever reason(injury or strategy). they have to "make up" the innings they missed in the field in a subsequent game before they can be listed as DH again. For example, a player is listed as DH for 4 innings, and in the 5th inning gets "pinch hit" for another player. Acceptable within the rules, but now both of those players aren't going to have to start in the field for at least 8-9 innings before being allowed to be listed as DH again. This would at least rein in the David Ortizes of the baseball world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted November 13, 2014 Author Share Posted November 13, 2014 Updated the poll (thanks to whoever added the original--TK or Jumbo. ES M(G)ods). Sorry for those who already voted. Please vote again. Really am curious as to how team allegience--specifically what league their team is a part of--impacts opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted November 13, 2014 Author Share Posted November 13, 2014 Well ****, this whole thing has turned into a disaster. Am I the only one who can't vote? EDIT: Boom, finally got it. Jesus H. Christ. You all have no idea how much **** I've gone through for this. I'm actually proud of myself. I live a sad existence lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrypticVillain Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 I don't like the DH. But wouldn't mind if the DH were in BOTH leagues. Having it in the AL and not the DL is so dumb. That's like the NFC not playing with kickers and the AFC playing with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins0721 Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 copied and pasted from MLB thread I prefer having a DH in both leagues. Here are my reasons: 1. It extends players careers. Many players who can't field anymore due to age/injuries can go DH and still have a productive end of their careers. Doubling the # of teams that can DH increases the amount of players who can remain productive. This is also somewhat selfish on my part since it would help the Nats, we could DH Ryan Zimmerman, but really I'm sure a lot of teams are in a similar situation with an aging, injury prone star who can't field. BFD - how about letting guys who can actually field, run & hit get a chance to play while they're young. Watching Fat Ortiz bat while spending the rest of his time eating bon-bons & drinking margaritas in the clubhouse between ABs sucks. Make him actually get sweated up like the pitcher he's facing for the 3rd time in the 7th inning. Advantage every DH that has ever had an AB. 2. It's more entertaining. Yeah I know blah blah blah strategy with the pitcher hitting, but honestly do people enjoy watching the pitcher hit? I hate when my team has two on two out yet you know the inning is over because Gio Gonzalez or Tanner Roark are up to bat. Nobody likes watching pitchers hit. It'd be like forcing QBs in the NFL to play on Special Teams. More entertaining? I love watching Joe Manager sweat when he needs to decide to pull Freddy Fireballer who's working on a 2-hitter in the 7th inning but is losing 4-1 because his team committed 3 errors to allow 4 unearned runs & now he needs to decide to leave in his pitcher or PH for him with the bases loaded and 0 out. Run-on sentence complete. 3. League uniformity. It's silly to have half the teams in a league playing with a different set of rules. I know back in the day the AL and the NL were considered different entities but that was like 50+ years ago. It's all MLB now. I mean imagine if in the NBA the Eastern Conference teams could only play with four players or if in the NFL you had AFC teams being allowed to have five downs to advance. And since you really can't go backwards, that means DH in both leagues. Yeah, get rid of the DH so both leagues are uniform. Those are absurd examples as it's nowhere near the same. The NFL has already radically changed the rules in favor of the offense. The demise of a true NFL RB is next - AP in MIN is the last of a dying breed because the league has devalued running & made so many rule changes to get more scoring via the pass. More scoring! More scoring! Please make it interesting so I don't need to understand the strategy. I want more scoring so I'll be interested. **** that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonez3 Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 Most of the objections I hear for the DH, isn't that the pitcher should have to bat (they do enough and are never valued for their bats anyway), but that the DH should have to field. So here's my compromise rule: For each inning a batter is listed in the lineup, he must take the field for 4 innings for every 9. I envision a usual situation would be a player starts the game as DH, then in the 5th inning, they have to take the field as 1B or whatever position, and the player they replace becomes the DH. If a player can't/doesn't take the field in the same game for whatever reason(injury or strategy). they have to "make up" the innings they missed in the field in a subsequent game before they can be listed as DH again. For example, a player is listed as DH for 4 innings, and in the 5th inning gets "pinch hit" for another player. Acceptable within the rules, but now both of those players aren't going to have to start in the field for at least 8-9 innings before being allowed to be listed as DH again. This would at least rein in the David Ortizes of the baseball world. Bad example with Ortiz because he's a good fielder, hardly a liability. Always has been, and that's playing about 10-15 games a year in the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted November 13, 2014 Author Share Posted November 13, 2014 Completely agree GoSkins0721. Nailed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins0721 Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 Bad example with Ortiz because he's a good fielder, hardly a liability. Always has been, and that's playing about 10-15 games a year in the field. So then let him play the other 90% of the games in the field. Let him run around chasing foul balls, Let him stand in the sun on the filed when it's 100 degrees in the shade in the middle of July. If he's so good in the field why does he ride the pine for 90% of the MLB games he plays? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carex Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 But that's why pinch hitters matter. That's why a manager has to decide whether it is worth it to take out a starter. Is there anyone on? Where in the game are you? How important is this one at bat? Close games in the NL involve multiple decisions like that, and require the team to have situational relievers for multiple contingencies. In the AL, you only take out your starter when he is getting shelled, your relievers are basically set up man, closer and filler, pinch hitters don't matter. Strategy consists of letting the fat guy swing and hoping he hits one out. I'm a fan of the Nationals, but in sports I like the idea of letting the athletes on the field make what happens happen and leave as little to off field stuff as possible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonez3 Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 So then let him play the other 90% of the games in the field. Let him run around chasing foul balls, Let him stand in the sun on the filed when it's 100 degrees in the shade in the middle of July. If he's so good in the field why does he ride the pine for 90% of the MLB games he plays? Don't get me wrong, there are better fielders. If AL got rid of DH last year, David Ortiz would play for nearly every other team in league... In his late 30s. How about making them bat 9th, that would be cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.